orangefaniniowa

Seattle NBA Brand Discussion

Recommended Posts

As a Rockets fan, i would never want my Rockets to go into Seattle to play any team other than the SUPERSONICS.  Miss those battles even though they usually kicked our ass (illegal defense).  Thanks for choking back to back years in the first round so we didn't have to face yall.  BACK TO BACK CHAMPS. 

 

Anyway, i hope they come back soon and New Orleans moves EAST.  I really like these concepts by Berlin Wall, and even though some might say the skyline logo is more nostalgia than anything, i dig that they won their championship in it and feel it's absolutely necessary to bring it back in a modernized update.  Much like the Rockets, changing brand after back to back titles was nothing but bad luck, same goes for the Sonics after changing and making it to the Finals in the first year of that brand but all downhill from there.

 

 

Sonicsalt.jpg

Sonicsawayconcept.jpg

Sonicshome.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bobster said:

There was an agreement in place when the Browns moved to Baltimore that the team would leave their name and "history" in Cleveland for an expansion team to be awarded when a suitable stadium was built.

 

There was no such agreement in place when the team moved.  In fact, the expectation was that the team would retain its name in Baltimore, which is why the governor of Maryland introduced Art Modell at a press conference as "the owner of the Baltimore Browns".

The deal to do violence to the record books was concocted later on, in an effort to stave off possible litigation and the risk of an injunction that would have blocked the move. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say a new team arrives in Seattle, is green and gold, and is called the SuperSonics. It's opening night, the arena is full, and Seattle basketball legends like Gary Payton, Shawn Kemp and Slick Watts are in the building.

 

Are the new Sonics allowed to show clips and photos of the previous incarnation in press materials and video packages to help connect the fan base to the new team? Or would you require them to put a disclaimer that says "IMAGES OF PREVIOUS SONICS ARE NOW THE OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER YOU DOLTS"?

 

I know that's excessive, but I'm not sure what people are asking for here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

Say a new team arrives in Seattle, is green and gold, and is called the SuperSonics. It's opening night, the arena is full, and Seattle basketball legends like Gary Payton, Shawn Kemp and Slick Watts are in the building.

 

Are the new Sonics allowed to show clips and photos of the previous incarnation in press materials and video packages to help connect the fan base to the new team? Or would you require them to put a disclaimer that says "IMAGES OF PREVIOUS SONICS ARE NOW THE OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER YOU DOLTS"?

 

I know that's excessive, but I'm not sure what people are asking for here.

 

Certainly not. It's a given that the people in the building understand that the team they're watching isn't the same exact team as the old one. It's a spiritual successor, not a direct continuation.

 

The record books should reflect that as well. If you wanted to compare stats of a Sonics MK I and Sonics MK II players, you'd use the category of "city history" rather than "franchise history."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be no return of the Supersonics, because the NBA has no incentive to expand until well into the next decade. And no one is interested in moving.

 

/Proceeds to douse thread with arctic water

Edited by buzzcut
punctuation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, buzzcut said:

There will be no return of the Supersonicsn because the NBA has no incentive to expand until well into the next decade. And no one is interested in moving.

 

/Proceeds to douse thread with arctic water

 

What will the incentive be "well into the next decade" versus soon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't the Sonics still have their history in Seattle?  It's shared with OKC but if a team ever comes back to Seattle, the Sonics will get their history back. Correct me if I'm wrong. 

 

Someone in this thread earlier mentioned how Houston retired the Oilers and chose to have a new brand. That's absolutely not true.   Bud kept the Oilers history and name in Tennessee and Bob wouldn't have been able to use it even if he wanted to.  Damn well know all of Houston would have voted for a return of the Oilers and demanded it had Bob McNair had the rights to use it even if Bob might have preferred his own team and legacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Maximus89 said:

Don't the Sonics still have their history in Seattle?  It's shared with OKC but if a team ever comes back to Seattle, the Sonics will get their history back. Correct me if I'm wrong. 

 

Someone in this thread earlier mentioned how Houston retired the Oilers and chose to have a new brand. That's absolutely not true.   Bud kept the Oilers history and name in Tennessee and Bob wouldn't have been able to use it even if he wanted to.  Damn well know all of Houston would have voted for a return of the Oilers and demanded it had Bob McNair had the rights to use it even if Bob might have preferred his own team and legacy.

Shared with who?  How could it be "shared" when there's nobody to to share it with?  The City or people of Seattle are not an entity that's going to "own" NBA history.  Again, the fact that the Thunder "own" it does not negate that it happened in Seattle.  I keep reading from "your side" that it "belongs" to the city.  I always figured that referred to more of an abstract sense about the City's connection with the team.  But I am starting to think that sometimes it literally means "the City of Seattle 'owns' the history."  It's not about "ownership."  The City cannot own that history.  Not only that but the City of OKC does not either.  I'd even argue the Thunder don't "own" it.  It's not "owned," per se.  It's stuff that happened and has been recorded it.  Nobody recorded how many points Xavier McDaniel scored on December 9 1991 vs. the Rockets so the Sonics or Seattle could own it.  They recorded it so anyone interested would know what happened.  As the keepers of that history, the NBA should not just change the number of points McDaniel scored in that (fake for the purposes of this paragraph) game.  The NBA should also not say that it happened to a team that did not even exist in 1991 or that was playing in some other city and did not employ Xavier McDaniel.  In documenting that history, as it happened, the NBA should also not (and is not) tell the people of Seattle that "this did not happen in Seattle."  It did happen in Seattle and fans old enough to remember it should do so fondly.  But in 2022, when Joe Anderson scores 50 points, it should not be recognized as "the first player in franchise history to score 50 points since Xavier McDaniel in 1991" (again, made up by me).  Because there's no lineage there.  The newspaper articles and play-by-play guys can reference McDaniel's big game, but it did not happen to the same franchise.

 

The OKC Thunder are the same franchise as the former Sonics.  At no point has the history been shared. It belongs to the Thunder at this point...I believe when the Sonics moved to OKC, the NBA said that if Seattle got a team within five years, they would be the Sonics (name and history).  It's been over five years.  So in no official way does anyone connected with Seattle have any claim to that history. That said, if Seattle ever does get a team, I'll be stunned if the history is not moved back to Seattle, Hornets style. So, while you are officially wrong at this point, should Seattle ever get a team, you'll turn out to be right.

 

Regarding the Oilers...How could "Houston" have decided to have a new brand? (Unless you mean "the Houston NFL Franchise").  I agree with you that the franchise really did not have the option to choose "Oilers."  I suppose the Tennessee team had been re-named "Titans" by that time so if the team would have requested the name and history transfer (particularly if the fanbase made it clear that it was integral to the ability to support them), the NFL would have granted it.  After all, what rationale would the NFL have to stick with "pre-Cleveland Deal" practices after what they did with the Browns?  I don't think that was going on in Houston...that's not to say that there were not Houston fans that would have preferred to get the Oilers name and/or history, but unlike the Hornets/Bobcats, Houston's NFL team is able to be supported without the old name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DG_Now said:

I know that's excessive, but I'm not sure what people are asking for here.

I just don't want team founded in 2019 pretending they won the 1979 NBA Championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I just don't want team founded in 2019 pretending they won the 1979 NBA Championship.

To paraphrase my recent post, we're asking that history be "recorded" rather than "owned."  Recorded history, in any truthful way, would not say that the 1979 NBA championship was won by a team to which the 1979 team has no historic lineage.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

I just don't want team founded in 2019 pretending they won the 1979 NBA Championship.

 

Ok. I'll get you some email lists and you can write a memo to the good people of Seattle to set them straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

 

Ok. I'll get you some email lists and you can write a memo to the good people of Seattle to set them straight.

Eh, I think @OnWis97 hit the nail on the head. Fans remembering it fondly is fine. Hell, the team honouring it is fine. My only issue would be the team claiming they've won it. Like say the new SuperSonics win the NBA title in 2025. Claiming that the team "won their first title since 1979" would just be silly. And wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Maximus89 said:

As a Rockets fan, i would never want my Rockets to go into Seattle to play any team other than the SUPERSONICS.  Miss those battles even though they usually kicked our ass (illegal defense).  Thanks for choking back to back years in the first round so we didn't have to face yall.  BACK TO BACK CHAMPS. 

 

Anyway, i hope they come back soon and New Orleans moves EAST.  I really like these concepts by Berlin Wall, and even though some might say the skyline logo is more nostalgia than anything, i dig that they won their championship in it and feel it's absolutely necessary to bring it back in a modernized update.  Much like the Rockets, changing brand after back to back titles was nothing but bad luck, same goes for the Sonics after changing and making it to the Finals in the first year of that brand but all downhill from there.

 

 

Sonicsalt.jpg

Sonicsawayconcept.jpg

Sonicshome.jpg

 

I like the general premise of this.  The Thunder number font would be a really odd choice though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

Eh, I think @OnWis97 hit the nail on the head. Fans remembering it fondly is fine. Hell, the team honouring it is fine. My only issue would be the team claiming they've won it. Like say the new SuperSonics win the NBA title in 2025. Claiming that the team "won their first title since 1979" would just be silly. And wrong.

 

Yeah, but ultimately who cares. Unless you're able to tell an entire city to think something different, I think this is a pointless hill to die on.

 

Like, I understand the technicality of the "historical record," but it's a record that's pretty meaningless in the grand scheme of things. And, in contrast to conspiracy theorists doing actual harm, people thinking new Sonics (or Browns or Hornets) are an extension of old Sonics (or Browns or Hornets) is probably okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DG_Now said:

I understand the technicality of the "historical record,"

Well there you go. I was trained in the art of history :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ice_Cap said:

Well there you go. I was trained in the art of history :)

 

Then you should know about quoting out of context. :!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DG_Now said:

Then you should know about quoting out of context. :!:

There's a difference between intentionally quoting out of context and just not willing to have the same discussion over the same basic talking points.

 

Your point. Who cares about the accuracy of the historical record, because it's sports it doesn't matter, fans have their memories and the (hypothetically) new Sonics and the old Sonics are tied together because of that.

My point. All well and good, but I've spent a good chunk of life being trained to respect the historical record the art of archiving. What happened happened. We can debate everything that stems from the facts but not the facts themselves. 

 

And ultimately that was my goal with my quote. To get across to you why I feel like I do. If you don't agree, fine. Whatever. I'm simply explaining myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

There's a difference between intentionally quoting out of context and just not willing to have the same discussion over the same basic talking points.

 

 

And yet...

 

34 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Your point. Who cares about the accuracy of the historical record, because it's sports it doesn't matter, fans have their memories and the (hypothetically) new Sonics and the old Sonics are tied together because of that.

My point. All well and good, but I've spent a good chunk of life being trained to respect the historical record the art of archiving. What happened happened. We can debate everything that stems from the facts but not the facts themselves. 

 

And ultimately that was my goal with my quote. To get across to you why I feel like I do. If you don't agree, fine. Whatever. I'm simply explaining myself.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

 

And yet...

 

 

EDIT-

Actually, I'll take a swing in the dark because I'm not sure you actually want a real discussion here. If you're mad about me "quoting out of context" sorry.

I'm just saying why I think the historical record is important. The fine people of Seattle can reminisce about the old or new Sonics however they like. That's not my concern.   

Edited by Ice_Cap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.